Abstract

This paper examines the idea that medical professions in the United Kingdom have, as a result of restrictive practices of various kinds, managed to obtain rates of return to their education and training well above those achieved in other professions. It concludes that after making various adjustments, in particular allowing for differences in hours worked, the returns obtained are in most cases not very different from those for other professions. With the exception of dentists there is therefore no clear-cut evidence from earnings data alone of restrictive practices in the medical professions.